Reading presenters: Lorez Bailey, Donna Reed, Susan Thompson Teachers and Technoliteracy. Chapter 5: “Patterns and Principles of Classroom Practice”
By, Colin Lankshear and Ilana Snyder (with Bill Green). 2000.
( EDCT READER pages 86 to 96. Note: page numbers cited in text are the authors’ book’s pages.)
Authors Lankshear and Snyder did studies of classrooms using information technology in schools in Australia and determined what was effective as well as what they considered could be improved. Although their book (from which this chapter is from) is almost ten years old and was published in Australia, it still rings true for schools in America today. These two authors suggest their recommendations not just for Australian schools but also for Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States. They list patterns they saw of ineffective educational technology practices and they suggest principles for making it work. They are not meaning to be overcritical of teachers, nor pushing technology. In fact they say that most teachers are performing miracles everyday, especially with all the demands they have.
Lankshear and Snyder realize that schools are often pressured from many sources to use technology. So overall, they advocate that if technology is going to be invested in, then teachers need to have more of a voice, have more time to become experts and also have an authentic purpose for the technology as well as tie-in with the outside world. We agree that schools need to be more hooked into the realities the teachers face in integrating information technology and that also that schools need to have curriculum that takes into account the reality of how this information technology can be applied for the real futures of the students.
Like other authors we have read so far in this class, these two authors bring up the pressure of technology and the pressure that teachers have to bring it into the classroom. The first of five patterns they found across the board in the schools that they studied is complexity, which realizes that teachers have a lot going on in their classroom and adding another thing just makes things that more complex. “The new component rearranges all the other interactions and may add many more in its own right”(112.) Not only are there complex interactions in the classroom, there is also fragility, according to Lankshear and Snyder, because of weak technical connections as well as insufficient staff support across the curriculum. Further, they say, that even if there is strong success in one class, it might not continue from grade to grade or from school to school. This discontinuity also exists in the divide between home and school (like Ito and others have discussed.)
Some teachers dress their lessons up with fancy technology, but as Lankshear and Snyder say, it’s like putting “new wine in old bottles.” Some teachers are not completely invested in what they can do with technology; they just use it to use it . Other than the technology in these teachers’ classrooms, their lessons look like the way they’ve looked before, which shows that there is conservation of the technology as a valuable resource. As the authors observed, “often there was a forced accommodation of new technologies… that severely limited their potential applications.” And the authors also repeatedly criticize that there is not enough link with what happens outside the classroom to consider the use of technology as real world. This they label as limited authenticity, their fifth pattern of inefficiency. “School learning is not embedded in ‘mature’ versions of outside social practices,” they critique.
The principles that the authors suggest seem reasonable and perhaps even ideal. As teachers and administrators know, there are always limitations of time and money. But as much as possible, these authors state there are five principles involved to make up a “framework” for “desired outcomes.” The authors insist that it should be “teachers first” since the teachers are the ones in charge of the classroom and on the frontline. The authors suggest that the teachers need to feel comfortable first. “Teachers need support in making use of new technologies to enhance their personal work before learning to use them in their teaching”(121). Further, teachers need to have “the skills and knowledge necessary for sensible, purposeful use of the hardware and software,” what the authors call “complementarity.” This also includes critically evaluating the information gleaned from the technology. Also for the technology to be used effectively, there must be workability. This includes provisions of time as well as of money. “The real costs of effective use are associated with the teachers’ time...” (126) Also because of money, certain schools are not going to have what others have. Lankshear and Snyder say that there should be equity. To make that happen, education technology should be: equal across the curriculum, with needed economic resources, skilled teachers, and students having equal access and equipment available to become experts. (Other authors/researchers like Jenkins have talked about the same participation gap that has precluded some students.) The last principle is to focus on trajectories – connected to “what people do at later points in life” -- so that the school experience isn’t just for the world of “school discourse.”
All in all, the authors often talk about making the technology “real” or at least as close to real world as possible. This authenticity of using classroom technology should be considered in two ways: 1.) teachers being authentically invested in the technology and 2.) matching it up with authentic ways that students use technology in their lives at the moment and may very well use later in their lives. The authors address the issues and some possible solutions, which might be very well out-dated in this time and space. But schools are, as the authors say, “technologies” themselves, and they often don’t evolve that quickly. Therefore, many of the same patterns linger and many of the principles might very well still be relevant.
Teachers and Technoliteracy. Chapter 5: “Patterns and Principles of Classroom Practice”
By, Colin Lankshear and Ilana Snyder (with Bill Green). 2000.
( EDCT READER pages 86 to 96. Note: page numbers cited in text are the authors’ book’s pages.)
Authors Lankshear and Snyder did studies of classrooms using information technology in schools in Australia and determined what was effective as well as what they considered could be improved. Although their book (from which this chapter is from) is almost ten years old and was published in Australia, it still rings true for schools in America today. These two authors suggest their recommendations not just for Australian schools but also for Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States. They list patterns they saw of ineffective educational technology practices and they suggest principles for making it work. They are not meaning to be overcritical of teachers, nor pushing technology. In fact they say that most teachers are performing miracles everyday, especially with all the demands they have.
Lankshear and Snyder realize that schools are often pressured from many sources to use technology. So overall, they advocate that if technology is going to be invested in, then teachers need to have more of a voice, have more time to become experts and also have an authentic purpose for the technology as well as tie-in with the outside world. We agree that schools need to be more hooked into the realities the teachers face in integrating information technology and that also that schools need to have curriculum that takes into account the reality of how this information technology can be applied for the real futures of the students.
Like other authors we have read so far in this class, these two authors bring up the pressure of technology and the pressure that teachers have to bring it into the classroom. The first of five patterns they found across the board in the schools that they studied is complexity, which realizes that teachers have a lot going on in their classroom and adding another thing just makes things that more complex. “The new component rearranges all the other interactions and may add many more in its own right”(112.) Not only are there complex interactions in the classroom, there is also fragility, according to Lankshear and Snyder, because of weak technical connections as well as insufficient staff support across the curriculum. Further, they say, that even if there is strong success in one class, it might not continue from grade to grade or from school to school. This discontinuity also exists in the divide between home and school (like Ito and others have discussed.)
Some teachers dress their lessons up with fancy technology, but as Lankshear and Snyder say, it’s like putting “new wine in old bottles.” Some teachers are not completely invested in what they can do with technology; they just use it to use it . Other than the technology in these teachers’ classrooms, their lessons look like the way they’ve looked before, which shows that there is conservation of the technology as a valuable resource. As the authors observed, “often there was a forced accommodation of new technologies… that severely limited their potential applications.” And the authors also repeatedly criticize that there is not enough link with what happens outside the classroom to consider the use of technology as real world. This they label as limited authenticity, their fifth pattern of inefficiency. “School learning is not embedded in ‘mature’ versions of outside social practices,” they critique.
The principles that the authors suggest seem reasonable and perhaps even ideal. As teachers and administrators know, there are always limitations of time and money. But as much as possible, these authors state there are five principles involved to make up a “framework” for “desired outcomes.” The authors insist that it should be “teachers first” since the teachers are the ones in charge of the classroom and on the frontline. The authors suggest that the teachers need to feel comfortable first. “Teachers need support in making use of new technologies to enhance their personal work before learning to use them in their teaching”(121). Further, teachers need to have “the skills and knowledge necessary for sensible, purposeful use of the hardware and software,” what the authors call “complementarity.” This also includes critically evaluating the information gleaned from the technology. Also for the technology to be used effectively, there must be workability. This includes provisions of time as well as of money. “The real costs of effective use are associated with the teachers’ time...” (126) Also because of money, certain schools are not going to have what others have. Lankshear and Snyder say that there should be equity. To make that happen, education technology should be: equal across the curriculum, with needed economic resources, skilled teachers, and students having equal access and equipment available to become experts. (Other authors/researchers like Jenkins have talked about the same participation gap that has precluded some students.) The last principle is to focus on trajectories – connected to “what people do at later points in life” -- so that the school experience isn’t just for the world of “school discourse.”
All in all, the authors often talk about making the technology “real” or at least as close to real world as possible. This authenticity of using classroom technology should be considered in two ways: 1.) teachers being authentically invested in the technology and 2.) matching it up with authentic ways that students use technology in their lives at the moment and may very well use later in their lives. The authors address the issues and some possible solutions, which might be very well out-dated in this time and space. But schools are, as the authors say, “technologies” themselves, and they often don’t evolve that quickly. Therefore, many of the same patterns linger and many of the principles might very well still be relevant.